You are here:

A Playful Approach to Fostering Motivation in a Distance Education Computer Programming Course: Behaviour Change and Student Perceptions ARTICLE

, University of South Africa

IRRODL Volume 19, Number 3, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press


The central role of motivation to learn in distance education has been noted, and gamification has been proposed as one approach to promote student motivation. This study explores promoting motivation in a distance education, third-year computer programming course via a gamified approach to improve coursework participation and student experience. Motivation was examined from a Self-Determination Theory (SDT) perspective, as gamified approaches often rely on external motivation and the explicit use of competition to engender internal motivation leading to desired behaviours. The results of using gamification in education are mixed, and its use is controversial. Two cycles of action research on the introduction of eight playful elements are reported on, and data relating to student engagement with the course and a student questionnaire was gathered. There was little evidence that the intervention led to behaviour change or improved scores; however, students responded very positively to the intervention, although some negative themes emerged. The extent to which the playful approach supported the basic psychological needs of SDT is discussed and the intervention\u2019s results critically considered, including whether the effort involved in such an approach was worth it. It was concluded that such playful approaches might have positive motivational effects.


Pilkington, C. (2018). A Playful Approach to Fostering Motivation in a Distance Education Computer Programming Course: Behaviour Change and Student Perceptions. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(3),. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved August 22, 2018 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Abu-Dawood, S. (2016). The cognitive and social motivational affordances of gamification in e-learning environment. In Proceedings of the IEEE 16th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, ICALT 2016 (pp. 373–375). DOI> 10.1109/ICALT.2016.126
  • Adams, P.(2010). Action research. In Encyclopedia of Research Design (pp. 5–10).
  • Baskerville, R.L., & Myers, M.D. (2004). Special issue on action research in information systems: Making IS research relevant to practice— Foreword. MIS Quarterly, 28(3), 329–335.
  • Bogost, I. (2014). Why gamification is bullshit. In S.P. Walz & S. Deterding (Eds.), The gameful world: Approaches, issues, applications (pp. 65–79). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Buckley, P., & Doyle, E. (2014). Gamification and student motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(6), 1162–1175. DOI> 10.1080/10494820.2014.964263
  • ">Http://
  • Butgereit, L. (2015). An experiment in using gamification in an information technology distance classroom. In Proceedings of the 44th Conference of the Southern African Computer Lecturers’ Association (SACLA) (pp. 69–76). Johannesburg.
  • Butler, S., & Ahmed, D.T. (2016). Gamification to engage and motivate students to achieve computer science learning goals. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (pp. 237–240). Las Vegas, USA: IEEE.
  • De Villiers, M.R. (2005). Three approaches as pillars for interpretive Information Systems research: Development research, action research and grounded theory. In Proceedings of the 2005
  • Deterding, S., O’Hara, K., Sicart, M., Dixon, D., & Nacke, L. (2011). Gamification: Using game design elements in non-game contexts. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2011; pp. 2425–2428). Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Fotaris, P., Mastoras, T., Leinfellner, R., & Rosunally, Y. (2016). Climbing up the leaderboard: An
  • Garrison, R. (2000). Theoretical challenges for distance education in the 21st century: A shift from
  • Harrington, B. (2016). TrAcademic. In Proceedings of the 21st Western Canadian Conference on
  • Holmberg, B. (1983). Guided didactic conversation in distance education. In David Sewart, D. Keegan, & B. Holmberg (Eds.), Distance education: International perspectives (pp. 114–122). London:
  • Hung, A.C.Y. (2017). A critique and defense of gamification. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 15(1), 57–72.
  • Keller, J.M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Design, 10(3), 2–10. DOI> 10.1007/978-1-4419-1250-3_3
  • ">Http://
  • Keller, J.M. (1999). Using the ARCS motivational process in computer-based instruction and distance education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 78, 39–47.
  • Maia, R.F., & Graeml, F.R. (2015). Playing and learning with gamification: An in-class concurrent and distributed programming activity. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–6). El
  • Robb, C.A., & Sutton, J. (2014). The importance of social presence and motivation in distance learning. The Journal of Technology, Management, and Applied Engineering, 31(2), 2–10.
  • Robertson,M.(2010). Can’t play, won’t play. Retrieved from
  • Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.
  • Seifert, T. (2004). Understanding student motivation. Educational Research, 46(2), 137–149.
  • Simpson, O. (2008). Motivating learners in open and distance learning: Do we need a new theory of learner support? Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 23(3), 159– 297
  • These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact